On the Cult of Personality
Back in the 1980's there was a rock band called Living Colour. This band's greatest contribution to music (besides being black, a rare thing in the hard rock world) was a song entitled "Cult of Personality". Basically, this muse is about how all us lemmings throughout history line up behind a charismatic 'Dear Leader'. That leader can be a pacifist like Ghandi or Martin Luther King, Jr. or a sadistic, sociopathic murderer like Josef Stalin or Adolph Hitler. That's not really the big point, though. The main thing the lyricist was trying to say is that humans tend to turn off our higher brain functions, and blindly follow this charismatic force to either two places; a better world or into the abyss.
The Cult of Personality is alive and well in 2011. Many of us during the election of 2008 wanted "change". Bush the Younger had taken this nation to an undeclared war under extremely controversial circumstances in Iraq and to a lesser extent in Afghanistan. After seven years of continuous fighting with no end in sight even staunch conservatives started saying it was time to bring the troops home. The economic collapse of 2008 was mere icing on the cake. The public was aroused from it's slumber, and wanted a leader in a completely different mold from Bush. What they got, to quote The Who, was "the new boss, same as the old boss."
Out of seemingly nowhere, a first-term democratic Senator from Illinois by the name of Barack Obama shocked the political establishment by beating the hands-down favorite, Hillary Clinton, in the democratic primary, and following up that victory with a decisive general election win over tired, boring neo-conservative fellow Senator John McCain (R-AZ). Now, three years into his administration, we can now see Obama for what he truly is; a bought-and-paid for mouthpiece for the powers-that-be. Wars have not been stopped, but expanded. Constitutional rights have not been restored, but are increasingly being eroded with obscene violations being conducted daily by the Gestapo-esque TSA and the unconstitutional Patriot Act. The spending...oh the spending. While Bush was no Ludwig von Mises (google him...he's worth a Wiki read) he makes Obama look like a penny-pincher.
Obama should never have been elected President. Not because I disagree with him on politics. That is not enough. He shouldn't have been elected because his main claim to fame was his charisma, not his deeds or qualifications. Instead, Americans elected the man with the same intellectual criteria as a high school President; by his "likability"; how he looks on camera and how he gives a speech. Cult of Personality? You bet.
Now, it is high time we fixed that mistake. A man is running for President that is the antithesis of every other serious candidate. This man is not handsome. He is not going to provoke "a thrill running up my leg" ala Chris Matthews. Instead, he is simply an honest man who desires more than any one thing a return to our constitutional core values of small government and fiscal responsibility. He wants our republic back. He wants to throw the powers-at-be straight out the door just like patriots once did to a King back in 1776. His name is Ron Paul, and if you have had enough of being treated like a child I would suggest you visit his website, and see what he is all about.
In conclusion, it is a shame that I even need to write a blog post like this one in the 21st century. I am reminded of Khan's line in the original Star Trek, "Everything changes, except man." While we should intellectually know that the two political parties are really just two parts of a larger whole we still hold on to our tribal instincts rooting for one side to triumph over the other. How's that working for you?
The republic is not dead, but if we are so stupid as to elect another "class president", then I fear for the future. Our debt is such that we simply cannot afford another four years of borrowing and spending at levels that will force our nation into economic ruin. Our "nation building" is not only costly in terms of human lives and material treasure,but it goes against the core values of our republic. Ignoring these realities has cost us too much for too long.
You want "change"? It's Ron Paul, not Barack Obama.
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Post Nineteen
On The Constitution and Military Action
Ask ten random people who has the power within the U.S. Constitution to declare war, and I would predict the following results. One would say, "What Constitution?", two would say "Congress", three would say "The President", and the rest would say "Charlie Sheen". Just kidding (sort of). The Libyan mess has brought up the issue of who actually has the power within our society to initiate military action. Thanks to my tutor, Judge Andrew Napolitano (whom you can see on Fox News Business every night at 8:00pm or 11:00pm), and spending a few minutes reading the Constitution I have a much better understanding of this answer.
The Constitution addresses the concept of war in two parts; one directly the other indirectly. For the direct language we have Article I, Section 8 which specifically says that Congress has the sole authority to declare war. Now, I'm no genius, but I don't think the Founders wanted any deviation from this very basic edict. Unless exigent circumstances exist (such as an invasion or some kind of surprise attack) a state of war can only exist if Congress so declares. End of story, right? Not so fast....
Modern thinking has vastly strengthened the power of the Presidency in this area. The indirect route taken by these thinkers cite Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution where The President is named the Commander and Chief of the military. In their view, this title grants the President the power of a monarch. He can use the military where he sees fit regardless of the situation. I have no idea where this view came from or how it is so easily justified by our leaders (enabled by our silence and "support the troops" rah-rah), but it is almost as if they simply ignore the Constitution as if it's irrelevant.
In an effort to curb the power of the President regarding the use of military force Congress passed what is known as the War Powers Resolution in 1973. In short, the War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of initiating military action, and such action can only last a maximum of 60 days without congressional approval (or a declaration of war). The constitutionality of this resolution is dubious at best, even among supporters of limiting presidential power, and all Presidents basically ignore the intent of the Resolution; effectively neutering it's supposed check on military adventurism.
After President Obama's address to the nation last night it is clear we are heading towards a constitutional crisis in regards to the use of military force against sovereign nations. Obama basically said that where massacres of a population COULD occur the United States can intervene militarily to prevent this future tragedy. The authority to commit the United States to such a military exercise comes from the President's own hubris, and completely removes Congress from the equation. In the case of Libya, Obama has justified his actions because the United Nations Security Council gave him the go ahead. Since when has the United Nations Security Council superseded our own Congress? Finally, in an act of ultimate hypocrisy,
then-Senator Obama said on the floor of the Senate that he believed Bush the Younger's invasion of Iraq was unconstitutional. This fact alone shows the utter contempt our leaders hold not only for the Constitution, but for us, as well.
Even though it may seem as if the Constitution is beyond saving there is hope. Republicans like Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), his father, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) have banded together with Democrats like Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) to stand up to this trouncing of our beloved republic. Whether they are successful depends on us. Take a look at your Representative or Senator's stand on this insanity. If they are being a good lemming and jumping off the cliff because the pied piper said so, then maybe it's time for that person to be retired.
Our country is not a dictatorship, monarchy, or military junta. While throwing despots like Gaddafi and Hussein into the category of Lucifer with our right hand, with our left we do business with repressive regimes like Saudi Arabia and China who are in the exact same category. Worse, our President has assumed for himself the power of a dictator while at the same time destroying his enemy for assuming that same power for himself. It is a wrong that cannot stand in a country that claims, "In God we Trust".
George Washington, the first President, knew that he could not assume the powers of a King even though the whole country was ready to anoint him as such. The genius of our form of government is that our Founding Fathers understood history; that for every Julius Caesar, there is a Nero; that for every Peter the Great, there is an Ivan the Terrible. We cannot put our fate in the hands of one person; it is the surest way to tyranny ever devised, and the greatest con in history.
Ask ten random people who has the power within the U.S. Constitution to declare war, and I would predict the following results. One would say, "What Constitution?", two would say "Congress", three would say "The President", and the rest would say "Charlie Sheen". Just kidding (sort of). The Libyan mess has brought up the issue of who actually has the power within our society to initiate military action. Thanks to my tutor, Judge Andrew Napolitano (whom you can see on Fox News Business every night at 8:00pm or 11:00pm), and spending a few minutes reading the Constitution I have a much better understanding of this answer.
The Constitution addresses the concept of war in two parts; one directly the other indirectly. For the direct language we have Article I, Section 8 which specifically says that Congress has the sole authority to declare war. Now, I'm no genius, but I don't think the Founders wanted any deviation from this very basic edict. Unless exigent circumstances exist (such as an invasion or some kind of surprise attack) a state of war can only exist if Congress so declares. End of story, right? Not so fast....
Modern thinking has vastly strengthened the power of the Presidency in this area. The indirect route taken by these thinkers cite Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution where The President is named the Commander and Chief of the military. In their view, this title grants the President the power of a monarch. He can use the military where he sees fit regardless of the situation. I have no idea where this view came from or how it is so easily justified by our leaders (enabled by our silence and "support the troops" rah-rah), but it is almost as if they simply ignore the Constitution as if it's irrelevant.
In an effort to curb the power of the President regarding the use of military force Congress passed what is known as the War Powers Resolution in 1973. In short, the War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of initiating military action, and such action can only last a maximum of 60 days without congressional approval (or a declaration of war). The constitutionality of this resolution is dubious at best, even among supporters of limiting presidential power, and all Presidents basically ignore the intent of the Resolution; effectively neutering it's supposed check on military adventurism.
After President Obama's address to the nation last night it is clear we are heading towards a constitutional crisis in regards to the use of military force against sovereign nations. Obama basically said that where massacres of a population COULD occur the United States can intervene militarily to prevent this future tragedy. The authority to commit the United States to such a military exercise comes from the President's own hubris, and completely removes Congress from the equation. In the case of Libya, Obama has justified his actions because the United Nations Security Council gave him the go ahead. Since when has the United Nations Security Council superseded our own Congress? Finally, in an act of ultimate hypocrisy,
then-Senator Obama said on the floor of the Senate that he believed Bush the Younger's invasion of Iraq was unconstitutional. This fact alone shows the utter contempt our leaders hold not only for the Constitution, but for us, as well.
Even though it may seem as if the Constitution is beyond saving there is hope. Republicans like Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), his father, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) have banded together with Democrats like Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) to stand up to this trouncing of our beloved republic. Whether they are successful depends on us. Take a look at your Representative or Senator's stand on this insanity. If they are being a good lemming and jumping off the cliff because the pied piper said so, then maybe it's time for that person to be retired.
Our country is not a dictatorship, monarchy, or military junta. While throwing despots like Gaddafi and Hussein into the category of Lucifer with our right hand, with our left we do business with repressive regimes like Saudi Arabia and China who are in the exact same category. Worse, our President has assumed for himself the power of a dictator while at the same time destroying his enemy for assuming that same power for himself. It is a wrong that cannot stand in a country that claims, "In God we Trust".
George Washington, the first President, knew that he could not assume the powers of a King even though the whole country was ready to anoint him as such. The genius of our form of government is that our Founding Fathers understood history; that for every Julius Caesar, there is a Nero; that for every Peter the Great, there is an Ivan the Terrible. We cannot put our fate in the hands of one person; it is the surest way to tyranny ever devised, and the greatest con in history.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Post Eighteen
On Libya
I try not to stray into the wild and woolly world of foreign affair op-eds as these subjects are highly controversial, and could provoke unwanted chagrin from those who read this blog. However, the media has so badly handled the Libya conflict that I thought I would dedicate a short blog to getting the facts straight. When you study or read about a civil war one must at least have some historical perspective beyond that being provided by our traditional media sources. Here is a brief history lesson.
The first thing you should know about Libya is that Libya is not a country in the normal sense. After World War II, the victorious Allied powers drew a few lines on a map, and put a king in charge of the newly-drawn country. It says something about the creation when the king, Idris-al Sanusi, wanted no part of the plan. He was first and foremost a tribal ruler of a section of what became Libya, and had no ambition beyond that role. This king was overthrown by a military coup lead by a junta of ambitious junior army officers in 1969, and that was when Muammar Gaddafi came to power. Throughout the Cold War, Lybia was a pawn of the Soviet Union, and like Castro in Cuba, was given generous amounts of military equipment in order to stay in power.
During Libya's time as a Soviet client-state it embarked on foolish terrorist operations (like the Pan Am disaster over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988) which made the regime a pariah and embarrassment even to it's Soviet benefactor. In recent years, Gaddafi has tried rebuilding his status in the world, and until recent events, has been a trusted trade partner with several Western European nations including Great Britain.
The country of Libya is actually composed of three tribal regions: 1. Tripolitania (western Libya which includes the largest city and the capitol, Tripoli) 2. Cyrenaica (eastern Libya which includes Benghazi and Tobruk; the two cities that are involved in the rebellion) and 3. Fezzan (southern Libya which is primarily desert and oasis). These are tribal regions in the literal sense. The only thing that really binds them together is their religion, Islam. Of these two loyalties, tribe and Islam, tribe holds more sway with most people.
Of course, the only real reason anyone cares about Libya in the first place is oil. Europe is the prime consumer of the substance from this region, and the regional powers have been fighting over the area for a very long time. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that the leading countries pressing for a no-fly zone are European.
It also says something when the Arab League, an anti-democratic alliance of Arab despots, supports the European call for the destruction of the Gaddafi regime. Common sense would indicate that when democratic western countries and dictatorial despotic regimes agree on something this significant then something stinks. I'm not saying that Gaddafi is a good guy because he isn't. He is a murderous despot who has no respect for human rights or the welfare of his people. But I could say that about most of the Arab League and OPEC.
Here is the bottom line: Libya is not a country, and it never has been. We have no right to dictate it's fate because the people who actually live there don't even want to be part of the country we created in the first place. Instead, this situation should be allowed to run it's course without the intervention of Western or Arab powers whose interests lie in nothing greater than their own greed and avarice.
For centuries, outside powers have decided the fate of "countries" like Libya. It's high-time we start letting people be truly free by deciding for themselves what is best for them. Gaddafi's days are numbered in any case; his position has been irreparably weakened, and you can only pay a mercenary army so long before the money runs out.
I am not a fool, and I do realize that oil is essential to our economy. But consider that Libay only represents less than 2% of the world's oil reserves. Also consider that Libya's contributions to the U.S. oil supply is negligible. And, finally, consider that a far more cost effective strategy would be to allow new oil drilling and refining in the U.S. rather than involving ourselves in another civil conflict. What makes more sense?
As Galadriel in Lord of the Rings says, "The quest stands upon the edge of a knife. Stray but a little and it will fail to the ruin of all." Let us hope that our leaders have the prescient wisdom to see the situation for what it is, not what they want it to be. The time for Wilsonian Democracy and Manifest Destiny is over. We can either accept this fact, or proceed down a very dark road indeed.
I try not to stray into the wild and woolly world of foreign affair op-eds as these subjects are highly controversial, and could provoke unwanted chagrin from those who read this blog. However, the media has so badly handled the Libya conflict that I thought I would dedicate a short blog to getting the facts straight. When you study or read about a civil war one must at least have some historical perspective beyond that being provided by our traditional media sources. Here is a brief history lesson.
The first thing you should know about Libya is that Libya is not a country in the normal sense. After World War II, the victorious Allied powers drew a few lines on a map, and put a king in charge of the newly-drawn country. It says something about the creation when the king, Idris-al Sanusi, wanted no part of the plan. He was first and foremost a tribal ruler of a section of what became Libya, and had no ambition beyond that role. This king was overthrown by a military coup lead by a junta of ambitious junior army officers in 1969, and that was when Muammar Gaddafi came to power. Throughout the Cold War, Lybia was a pawn of the Soviet Union, and like Castro in Cuba, was given generous amounts of military equipment in order to stay in power.
During Libya's time as a Soviet client-state it embarked on foolish terrorist operations (like the Pan Am disaster over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988) which made the regime a pariah and embarrassment even to it's Soviet benefactor. In recent years, Gaddafi has tried rebuilding his status in the world, and until recent events, has been a trusted trade partner with several Western European nations including Great Britain.
The country of Libya is actually composed of three tribal regions: 1. Tripolitania (western Libya which includes the largest city and the capitol, Tripoli) 2. Cyrenaica (eastern Libya which includes Benghazi and Tobruk; the two cities that are involved in the rebellion) and 3. Fezzan (southern Libya which is primarily desert and oasis). These are tribal regions in the literal sense. The only thing that really binds them together is their religion, Islam. Of these two loyalties, tribe and Islam, tribe holds more sway with most people.
Of course, the only real reason anyone cares about Libya in the first place is oil. Europe is the prime consumer of the substance from this region, and the regional powers have been fighting over the area for a very long time. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that the leading countries pressing for a no-fly zone are European.
It also says something when the Arab League, an anti-democratic alliance of Arab despots, supports the European call for the destruction of the Gaddafi regime. Common sense would indicate that when democratic western countries and dictatorial despotic regimes agree on something this significant then something stinks. I'm not saying that Gaddafi is a good guy because he isn't. He is a murderous despot who has no respect for human rights or the welfare of his people. But I could say that about most of the Arab League and OPEC.
Here is the bottom line: Libya is not a country, and it never has been. We have no right to dictate it's fate because the people who actually live there don't even want to be part of the country we created in the first place. Instead, this situation should be allowed to run it's course without the intervention of Western or Arab powers whose interests lie in nothing greater than their own greed and avarice.
For centuries, outside powers have decided the fate of "countries" like Libya. It's high-time we start letting people be truly free by deciding for themselves what is best for them. Gaddafi's days are numbered in any case; his position has been irreparably weakened, and you can only pay a mercenary army so long before the money runs out.
I am not a fool, and I do realize that oil is essential to our economy. But consider that Libay only represents less than 2% of the world's oil reserves. Also consider that Libya's contributions to the U.S. oil supply is negligible. And, finally, consider that a far more cost effective strategy would be to allow new oil drilling and refining in the U.S. rather than involving ourselves in another civil conflict. What makes more sense?
As Galadriel in Lord of the Rings says, "The quest stands upon the edge of a knife. Stray but a little and it will fail to the ruin of all." Let us hope that our leaders have the prescient wisdom to see the situation for what it is, not what they want it to be. The time for Wilsonian Democracy and Manifest Destiny is over. We can either accept this fact, or proceed down a very dark road indeed.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Post Seventeen
On Classical Music
I love classical music. I know, I know, that's "elevator" music to most people, or if you're feeling really cruel, "old fart" music. While I do agree that some classical pieces are downright horrible, I could say the same for any kind of music. What most people fail to grasp is that most of what we hear today was inspired, in no small measure, by the masters of what is known as classical music.
Like any genre, classical music is just a broad description. Classical music consists of genres within genres, and is not something that is very easy to define by a few simple words. For example, the genre is defined by three "Periods" set by a period of years: Baroque (1600-1750)), Classical (1750-1830), and Romantic (1830-1910 and my favorite) are the three accepted ages of classical music. These periods are broad; they are not meant to be hard and fast rules. You have various overlap, and some composers defy classification. For example, based on the time he lived Mozart was so varied in his musical composition you could put him in either Classical or Romantic; some lovers would put him in his own Period.
Each Period was defined by notable composers who stood head and shoulders above most of their contemporaries; Baroque with J.S. Bach, Classical with Beethoven and Romantic with Tchiakovsky. Each of these composers were the veritable "rock gods" of their day. I am not taking away anything from other composers, but I think most people have heard of at least one of these composers. I doubt you will be seeing the same staying power out of 99% of the musicians today.
To me, classical music is a very personal kind of music. At it's best, this music can take hold of your heart and move it like few things can. One of my favorite pieces is Beethoven's 9th Symphony. Everyone knows the piece because of the famous "Ode to Joy" chorus, but the symphony itself is a miracle on paper. Four movements (most symphonies have three) combining and forming into a work of genius and virtuosity. Beethoven's works inspired an entire generation of German people to forge a nation that eventually rivaled that of the great superpower of the day, Great Britian. His works are a remarkable achievment right up there with any scientific breakthrough.
I think one of the reasons classical music gets the shaft in the modern era is that it is a music that requires focus and patience to truly appreciate. What's more, the music is best enjoyed live which few young people seem interested in doing. Going to the symphony, instead of an all-night rave? No. It's funny as some of the best classical works, like symphonies, can be quite a taxing experience. Some run an hour long, and once you get caught up in their power it's as addictive as any drug.
If you are fortunate enough to have a local symphony in your area you really owe yourself a favor to try it out. Some of the greatest musical experiences of my life took place watching my local symphony perform my favorite works. Last week, my wife and I had the thrill of seeing Beethoven's 5th Symphony peformed at a very high level; as good as most CD recordings. For those of you who don't know, the 5th is the symphony that begins with "Da Da Da Duh". It's so much more than that, however. The majesty of the 2nd and 3rd movements eclipse the opening movement in every way. The conductor, a young man from Canada, had the orchestra moving at a furious pace which is quite untraditional for this piece. Usually, the 5th is peformed "dignified"; which, to me, equals boring. I have only heard one other recording of the 5th that was better than this performance. It was that good.
One the best parts of classical music is it's sheer variety. Want large-scale, earth-shaking, full orchestral works? Check. Want small-scale, intimate chamber works:? Check. Want virtuoso solo peformances from piano to cello? Check. Want opera? Check. It's amazing how many choices one has when starting to explore this world, and that can be both good and bad. With so many choices one can simply become overwhelmed. Worse, the person hears one piece that they hate, and conclude they hate classical music.
In conclusion, liking or not liking classical music is just the wrong way to look at the genre. I don't like all kinds of classical music. Most small-scale works put me to sleep no matter the performer or composer. While I love solo piano I'm not a big fan of the cello. Opera? Most of it is not my thing save for Wagner and some Mozart. What classical music requires above all other kinds of music is patience and commitment. It demands participation from the listener that simply is not part of the times in this instant gratification world. And that's sad.
Here are some of my favorite recordings. All of them are available for purchase on Amazon. I am also including a couple of book and movie references to help the initiate get underway without feeling overwhelmed. Give it a chance. You might just be surprised what you might find thereby opening yourself up to a whole new world.
Beethoven-Harnoncourt: 9 Symphonies (Box Set)
http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Harnoncourt-Symphonies-Ludwig-van-Beethoven/dp/B000000SDB/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1299072784&sr=1-2
Beethoven the way it was meant to be played. A reviewer once described the conductor, Nikolaus Harnoncourt, as "scary". Pretty much says it all. If you are looking for clinical interpretation where one agonizes over getting every note perfect this is definitely not for you. But if you are looking for passion beyond measure this is where it's at. The best cycle in existence. Affordable if bought used.
Rachmaninoff: Concerto No. 3 in D minor, Op. 30 / Tchaikovsky: Piano Concerto No. 1 in B flat minor, Op. 23
http://www.amazon.com/Rachmaninoff-Concerto-minor-Tchaikovsky-Piano/dp/B0000041DF/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1299073277&sr=1-1
Martha Argerich is the best classical piano player alive, and this is her signature performance. The Rach 3 is one of the hardest, if not the hardest, concerto ever written, and Argerich is more than up to the task. Consider this is peformed and recorded live, and one simply marvels at her super-human talent. The Tchaikovsky concerto is also very impressive, and is simply icing on the cake. If you love piano it doesn't get any better than this.
Bach - The Complete Brandenburg Concertos / Pearlman, Boston Baroque [Box set]
http://www.amazon.com/Bach-Complete-Brandenburg-Concertos-Pearlman/dp/B000003D1F/ref=sr_1_4?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1299073778&sr=1-4
I am not a huge fan of Baroque Period music, but of all Baroque works I like Bach's Brandenburg Concertos the best. A complete recording of all of the concertos is the most desirable, and Telarc's recordings tend to sound very, very good. Well worth the investment.
Wagner - Der Ring des Nibelungen (Ring Cycle) / Sir Georg Solti [Box set]
http://www.amazon.com/Wagner-Nibelungen-Cycle-Georg-Solti/dp/B0000042H4/ref=sr_1_2?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1299075062&sr=1-2
With opera, for me, it's either go big, or go home. Nothing is bigger than Wagner's Ring cycle. While old, this recording is the best complete version available. Not cheap, but opera fans (or fans of musicals) should really enjoy this set for years to come.
Chopin: Favorite Piano Works
http://www.amazon.com/Chopin-Favorite-Piano-Works-Frederic/dp/B00000427J/ref=sr_1_11?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1299075602&sr=1-11
Chopin is my favorite piano composer, and Ashkenazy is my favorite Chopin pianist. Whiile hardly complete, this very affordable 2-CD set is a great introduction to some of the most passionate piano works of all time.
Mozart: Requiem in D Minor, K. 626
http://www.amazon.com/Mozart-Requiem-Mozarts-Original-Manuscript/dp/B00022UO9I/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1299076189&sr=1-1
The work Mozart never completed due to his untimely death is one of his best. Harnoncourt is the perfect conductor for this massive endeavor. One the greatest masses ever written.
Orff: Carmina Burana
http://www.amazon.com/Mozart-Requiem-Mozarts-Original-Manuscript/dp/B00022UO9I/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1299076189&sr=1-1
Used as a background piece in many movies involving massive amounts of testosterone this is one of those pieces you either love or hate. The best way to describe this work is "primal". Not for the faint of heart, but if you like big, bold music this is one of the best works out there.
Star Wars Trilogy [Box Set]
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dpopular&field-keywords=star+wars
Modern Classical Music! Yes, it exists. Movie soundtracks have taken the place of massive symphonies. Still, John Williams' music is a worthy successor to the masters of the past. I never get tired of Darth Vader's entrance theme.
Copying Beethoven (DVD movie)
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dpopular&field-keywords=star+wars
Ed Harris plays a very believable Beethoven in this movie centered around Beethoven's 9th Symphony and one of his most controversial works. It's a fictional story based on historical facts, but I enjoyed this movie more than it's competitor, Immortal Beloved, because of the strength of Harris' performance. Well worth a couple of hours of your time.
Amadeus (Blu-ray or DVD movie)
http://www.amazon.com/Amadeus-Blu-ray-Book-Murray-Abraham/dp/B001JNNE64/ref=sr_1_5?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1299083433&sr=1-5
The best movie about the classical music genre by a huge margin. Hulce is spectacular as the genius Mozart and Abraham is even better as his rival, the composer Salieri. This Academy Award winner has some of the best set design and costumes ever seen in a modern movie, and it perfectly captures the feel of the time and place. It's long, but never feels like it. One of my favorite films of all time.
The NPR Guide to Building a Classical CD Collection : The 350 Essential Works
http://www.amazon.com/NPR-Guide-Building-Classical-Collection/dp/0761104879/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1299083605&sr=1-1
This book is all you need to start really enjoying classical music. It's a great guide for the beginner, and will steer you in the right direction. Indispensable.
I love classical music. I know, I know, that's "elevator" music to most people, or if you're feeling really cruel, "old fart" music. While I do agree that some classical pieces are downright horrible, I could say the same for any kind of music. What most people fail to grasp is that most of what we hear today was inspired, in no small measure, by the masters of what is known as classical music.
Like any genre, classical music is just a broad description. Classical music consists of genres within genres, and is not something that is very easy to define by a few simple words. For example, the genre is defined by three "Periods" set by a period of years: Baroque (1600-1750)), Classical (1750-1830), and Romantic (1830-1910 and my favorite) are the three accepted ages of classical music. These periods are broad; they are not meant to be hard and fast rules. You have various overlap, and some composers defy classification. For example, based on the time he lived Mozart was so varied in his musical composition you could put him in either Classical or Romantic; some lovers would put him in his own Period.
Each Period was defined by notable composers who stood head and shoulders above most of their contemporaries; Baroque with J.S. Bach, Classical with Beethoven and Romantic with Tchiakovsky. Each of these composers were the veritable "rock gods" of their day. I am not taking away anything from other composers, but I think most people have heard of at least one of these composers. I doubt you will be seeing the same staying power out of 99% of the musicians today.
To me, classical music is a very personal kind of music. At it's best, this music can take hold of your heart and move it like few things can. One of my favorite pieces is Beethoven's 9th Symphony. Everyone knows the piece because of the famous "Ode to Joy" chorus, but the symphony itself is a miracle on paper. Four movements (most symphonies have three) combining and forming into a work of genius and virtuosity. Beethoven's works inspired an entire generation of German people to forge a nation that eventually rivaled that of the great superpower of the day, Great Britian. His works are a remarkable achievment right up there with any scientific breakthrough.
I think one of the reasons classical music gets the shaft in the modern era is that it is a music that requires focus and patience to truly appreciate. What's more, the music is best enjoyed live which few young people seem interested in doing. Going to the symphony, instead of an all-night rave? No. It's funny as some of the best classical works, like symphonies, can be quite a taxing experience. Some run an hour long, and once you get caught up in their power it's as addictive as any drug.
If you are fortunate enough to have a local symphony in your area you really owe yourself a favor to try it out. Some of the greatest musical experiences of my life took place watching my local symphony perform my favorite works. Last week, my wife and I had the thrill of seeing Beethoven's 5th Symphony peformed at a very high level; as good as most CD recordings. For those of you who don't know, the 5th is the symphony that begins with "Da Da Da Duh". It's so much more than that, however. The majesty of the 2nd and 3rd movements eclipse the opening movement in every way. The conductor, a young man from Canada, had the orchestra moving at a furious pace which is quite untraditional for this piece. Usually, the 5th is peformed "dignified"; which, to me, equals boring. I have only heard one other recording of the 5th that was better than this performance. It was that good.
One the best parts of classical music is it's sheer variety. Want large-scale, earth-shaking, full orchestral works? Check. Want small-scale, intimate chamber works:? Check. Want virtuoso solo peformances from piano to cello? Check. Want opera? Check. It's amazing how many choices one has when starting to explore this world, and that can be both good and bad. With so many choices one can simply become overwhelmed. Worse, the person hears one piece that they hate, and conclude they hate classical music.
In conclusion, liking or not liking classical music is just the wrong way to look at the genre. I don't like all kinds of classical music. Most small-scale works put me to sleep no matter the performer or composer. While I love solo piano I'm not a big fan of the cello. Opera? Most of it is not my thing save for Wagner and some Mozart. What classical music requires above all other kinds of music is patience and commitment. It demands participation from the listener that simply is not part of the times in this instant gratification world. And that's sad.
Here are some of my favorite recordings. All of them are available for purchase on Amazon. I am also including a couple of book and movie references to help the initiate get underway without feeling overwhelmed. Give it a chance. You might just be surprised what you might find thereby opening yourself up to a whole new world.
Beethoven-Harnoncourt: 9 Symphonies (Box Set)
http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Harnoncourt-Symphonies-Ludwig-van-Beethoven/dp/B000000SDB/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1299072784&sr=1-2
Beethoven the way it was meant to be played. A reviewer once described the conductor, Nikolaus Harnoncourt, as "scary". Pretty much says it all. If you are looking for clinical interpretation where one agonizes over getting every note perfect this is definitely not for you. But if you are looking for passion beyond measure this is where it's at. The best cycle in existence. Affordable if bought used.
Rachmaninoff: Concerto No. 3 in D minor, Op. 30 / Tchaikovsky: Piano Concerto No. 1 in B flat minor, Op. 23
http://www.amazon.com/Rachmaninoff-Concerto-minor-Tchaikovsky-Piano/dp/B0000041DF/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1299073277&sr=1-1
Martha Argerich is the best classical piano player alive, and this is her signature performance. The Rach 3 is one of the hardest, if not the hardest, concerto ever written, and Argerich is more than up to the task. Consider this is peformed and recorded live, and one simply marvels at her super-human talent. The Tchaikovsky concerto is also very impressive, and is simply icing on the cake. If you love piano it doesn't get any better than this.
Bach - The Complete Brandenburg Concertos / Pearlman, Boston Baroque [Box set]
http://www.amazon.com/Bach-Complete-Brandenburg-Concertos-Pearlman/dp/B000003D1F/ref=sr_1_4?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1299073778&sr=1-4
I am not a huge fan of Baroque Period music, but of all Baroque works I like Bach's Brandenburg Concertos the best. A complete recording of all of the concertos is the most desirable, and Telarc's recordings tend to sound very, very good. Well worth the investment.
Wagner - Der Ring des Nibelungen (Ring Cycle) / Sir Georg Solti [Box set]
http://www.amazon.com/Wagner-Nibelungen-Cycle-Georg-Solti/dp/B0000042H4/ref=sr_1_2?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1299075062&sr=1-2
With opera, for me, it's either go big, or go home. Nothing is bigger than Wagner's Ring cycle. While old, this recording is the best complete version available. Not cheap, but opera fans (or fans of musicals) should really enjoy this set for years to come.
Chopin: Favorite Piano Works
http://www.amazon.com/Chopin-Favorite-Piano-Works-Frederic/dp/B00000427J/ref=sr_1_11?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1299075602&sr=1-11
Chopin is my favorite piano composer, and Ashkenazy is my favorite Chopin pianist. Whiile hardly complete, this very affordable 2-CD set is a great introduction to some of the most passionate piano works of all time.
Mozart: Requiem in D Minor, K. 626
http://www.amazon.com/Mozart-Requiem-Mozarts-Original-Manuscript/dp/B00022UO9I/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1299076189&sr=1-1
The work Mozart never completed due to his untimely death is one of his best. Harnoncourt is the perfect conductor for this massive endeavor. One the greatest masses ever written.
Orff: Carmina Burana
http://www.amazon.com/Mozart-Requiem-Mozarts-Original-Manuscript/dp/B00022UO9I/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1299076189&sr=1-1
Used as a background piece in many movies involving massive amounts of testosterone this is one of those pieces you either love or hate. The best way to describe this work is "primal". Not for the faint of heart, but if you like big, bold music this is one of the best works out there.
Star Wars Trilogy [Box Set]
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dpopular&field-keywords=star+wars
Modern Classical Music! Yes, it exists. Movie soundtracks have taken the place of massive symphonies. Still, John Williams' music is a worthy successor to the masters of the past. I never get tired of Darth Vader's entrance theme.
Copying Beethoven (DVD movie)
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dpopular&field-keywords=star+wars
Ed Harris plays a very believable Beethoven in this movie centered around Beethoven's 9th Symphony and one of his most controversial works. It's a fictional story based on historical facts, but I enjoyed this movie more than it's competitor, Immortal Beloved, because of the strength of Harris' performance. Well worth a couple of hours of your time.
Amadeus (Blu-ray or DVD movie)
http://www.amazon.com/Amadeus-Blu-ray-Book-Murray-Abraham/dp/B001JNNE64/ref=sr_1_5?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1299083433&sr=1-5
The best movie about the classical music genre by a huge margin. Hulce is spectacular as the genius Mozart and Abraham is even better as his rival, the composer Salieri. This Academy Award winner has some of the best set design and costumes ever seen in a modern movie, and it perfectly captures the feel of the time and place. It's long, but never feels like it. One of my favorite films of all time.
The NPR Guide to Building a Classical CD Collection : The 350 Essential Works
http://www.amazon.com/NPR-Guide-Building-Classical-Collection/dp/0761104879/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1299083605&sr=1-1
This book is all you need to start really enjoying classical music. It's a great guide for the beginner, and will steer you in the right direction. Indispensable.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Post Sixteen
On War
I love military history. It's one of my true passions that has never dulled for one second over the course of my life. If anything, as I have grown older, this passion has grown. I remember reading big books about World War II, you know, the ones with tons of pictures and maps that are always on clearance at Barnes and Noble, back when I was ten. Putting yourself in the trenches in World War I, or in the Valley of Death at Gettysburg, or in the shattered ruins of Stalingrad...there is nothing quite like it. The human trauma of war is something that should never be taken lightly, and in so many ways war is a paradox. It is humankind's greatest and worst creation. So many heroic and near-mythic acts are part of war. On the other hand, some of the world's worst acts are committed for God, King, or Country. To study military history is to study ourselves at our best and worst.
I wanted to share with you some of the media, both book and film, that I have found indispensable in studying this fascinating subject. Emphasis is on World War II; my favorite part of history. Why? Well, like many of you I had several veterans of the war in my family so there is a personal connection. I also feel this truly was our greatest generation (props to Brokaw). Teenagers who did nothing less than save the world from darkness; almost Tolkien in essence. Amazing stuff.
The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany by William L. Shirer
The first serious book I read about one of the greatest evils of the 20th Century. Shirer was a correspondent for CBS who lived in Nazi Germany until 1940. His account reads like a novel rather than dry history, and is simply a page-turner. No one book can adequately convey the horror of the Third Reich, but no other one volume has done it so well.
The Face of Battle
The Mask of Command
The Price of Admiralty, by John Keegan
The "holy trinity" of military history. Keegan is Britain's most notable military historian, and his three volumes covering land warfare, naval warfare, and command are a must-read for any serious student. The Face of Battle discusses the evolution of land warfare by analyzing various battles while The Price of Admiralty does the same thing for naval warfare. My favorite, The Mask of Command, goes behind the mask of military leaders to discover what makes a good and bad leader during times of war.
The Civil War: A Narrative, by Shelby Foote
Foote's three volume set is by far the most enjoyable overall history of the American Civil War ever written. Foote is a good ol' boy from Mississippi, and his antebellum southern charm comes through in his addictive writing. In particular, the section discussing the Battle of Gettysburg, "Stars in Their Courses", is both vivid and emotional in impact and historical accuracy.
When Titans Clashed; How the Red Army Stopped Hitler, by David M. Glantz
Glantz is the best historian covering the Soviet Union before and during World War II. The war between Nazi Germany and Soviet Union was the single largest military struggle of all time, and this book nails the reasons for the Nazi's failure and Soviet's success. Strips away tons of myths and assumptions about supposed German superiority and invincibility. A serious work, but still very readable.
The Forgotten Soldier, by Guy Sajer
First person accounts are a dime a dozen, but no other book has captured the heat of battle quite as well as this one. Whether liberties with the truth were taken or not (quite a controversy exists as to whether or not Sajer served with the unit described) one cannot deny the emotional impact of this book. You can smell the battlefield as Sajer recounts the exploits of a famous German division fighting the Red Army on the Eastern Front in World War II. Told from the frontline soldier's point of view with no political motivation.
Meditations, by Emperor Marcus Aurelius
A philosophy book written by a Roman Emperor? You bet. The Stoic philosophy defined every aspect of Roman society; especially in the training of their famous legions. The Roman legion dominated warfare for hundreds of years, and the rock-solid discipline hammered into their soldiers had a great deal to do with that success. Aurelius's masterpiece of philosophy is a good way to put yourself in their shoes.
Band of Brothers (book and miniseries)
Citizen Soldiers, by Stephen Ambrose
Ambrose is a great historian, even if some of his books were not as good as his World War II stuff. These two examples are some of the best books on the American experience in World War II in Europe. Band of Brothers was used as the basis for the HBO mini-series of the same name. It tells the story of a company of paratroopers from their early training until the end of the war. Citizen Soldiers is a more generic depiction of the U.S. Army's experience in Europe. Like Foote's Civil War books Ambrose combines solid history and readability which is rare thing in the genre.
Guadalcanal: The Definitive Account of the Landmark Battle, by Richard Frank
Guadalcanal was the greatest battle of the Pacific War in World War II. Both on sea and land the armies and navies of the Empire of Japan and the United States did battle to the death for dominance over an insignificant piece of real estate. Places like Henderson Field, Savo Island, Ironbottom Sound, and Edson's Ridge became legendary in military history. Victory by the United States ensured victory over Japan, though it took three more grueling years of no-quarter battle to achieve this forgone conclusion. This book covers all aspects of the battle better than any other single history.
The First World War, by John Keegan
This general history of World War I is Keegan at his best. I read the whole thing in one sitting. World War I is the saddest excuse for a war humanity ever came up with, and the millions who died in terrible trench warfare could attest to the futility of it all. The narrative can sometimes be dry as a martini in places, but the essence of the war and it's insanity come through loud and clear.
Saving Private Ryan, Directed by Steven Spielberg
One has never seen battle on film until one has seen the first twenty minutes of "Saving Private Ryan". Ambrose's book, D-Day: June 6th, 1944: The Climatic Battle of World War II, was used as the main source for this movie. While it takes huge historical leaps and liberties the authentic flavor of battle is what this movie is all about. No one interested in the subject should miss this film.
Triumph of the Will, Directed by Leni Riefenstahl
Hitler's masterwork of propaganda. Depicts the Nazi Party's Nuremberg rally in 1934. Watch it because it will show you, beyond any shadow of doubt, why millions of German's set aside their humanity to follow a demon into hell. Note: Not an endorsement of the message.
Paths of Glory, Directed by Stanley Kubrick
I love this World War I antiwar film even more than the better known "All Quiet on the Western Front". The horror of World War I is summed up perfectly in this film which stars Kirk Douglas in an unforgettable performance of a man fighting against his own army. One of the greatest closing arguments ever shot on screen should make mandatory viewing for trial lawyers.
Patton, Directed by Franklin J. Schaffner
General George S. Patton was America's greatest field general of World War II. A perfect study of the man, myth, and legend. As much a study in personality as a war movie. Patton exemplifies the best and worst of us, just like war itself. George C. Scott gave a performance of a lifetime, and the best opening scene of any movie in history (IMO).
Tora!, Tora!, Tora!, Directed by Richard Fleischer and Kinji Fukasaku
A boring telling of the Pearl Harbor attack unless you're a history buff, but no doubt the most accurate Pacific theatre movie made up until "The Pacific" mini-series. Interesting note: The American and Japanese portions of the film were shot separately allowing directors to show both perspectives so it's almost two movies in one. It's a history lesson, but a good one.
We Were Soldiers, Directed by Randall Wallace
An amazing film based on the book by the unit's commanding officer. The best Vietnam movie, IMO. A great study in command and courage. Some may find it a bit over the top with the "Ra, Ra, Ra," nature of the story. I think that's forgivable considering the tone of films like "Platoon" and "Apocalypse Now".
Gettysburg, Directed by Ronald F. Maxwell
A mostly accurate re-telling of the great American Civil War battle. Based on the historical novel, The Killer Angels, by Michael Shaara. A battle as massive as Gettysburg is very hard to portray in a film, but this one does it skillfully by focusing on the key players, and sticking to the bigger pieces of the battle. Interesting Note: Ted Turner plays an extra, and takes a bullet during Pickett's Charge, the film's climatic scene. He paid for the film, so I guess he was entitled.
The Grey Zone, Directed by Tim Blake Nelson
"Schindler's List" is the obvious choice for a Holocaust film, but I prefer my martini straight up. "The Grey Zone" is uncomfortable to watch from beginning to end, but should be required viewing for all students. It's movies like this that remind us all how fragile our humanity and freedom are, and how quickly they can be snuffed out in a blink of an eye.
Glory, Directed by Edward Zwick
My favorite war movie of all time. Beautiful cinematography and music. Performances from Matthew Broderick, Denzel Washington, and Morgan Freeman are Oscar worthy. The history is solid, and told with so much emotional impact you will not be dry-eyed by the end. Some movies are about the American Civil War; this was the war. Incredible.
I love military history. It's one of my true passions that has never dulled for one second over the course of my life. If anything, as I have grown older, this passion has grown. I remember reading big books about World War II, you know, the ones with tons of pictures and maps that are always on clearance at Barnes and Noble, back when I was ten. Putting yourself in the trenches in World War I, or in the Valley of Death at Gettysburg, or in the shattered ruins of Stalingrad...there is nothing quite like it. The human trauma of war is something that should never be taken lightly, and in so many ways war is a paradox. It is humankind's greatest and worst creation. So many heroic and near-mythic acts are part of war. On the other hand, some of the world's worst acts are committed for God, King, or Country. To study military history is to study ourselves at our best and worst.
I wanted to share with you some of the media, both book and film, that I have found indispensable in studying this fascinating subject. Emphasis is on World War II; my favorite part of history. Why? Well, like many of you I had several veterans of the war in my family so there is a personal connection. I also feel this truly was our greatest generation (props to Brokaw). Teenagers who did nothing less than save the world from darkness; almost Tolkien in essence. Amazing stuff.
The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany by William L. Shirer
The first serious book I read about one of the greatest evils of the 20th Century. Shirer was a correspondent for CBS who lived in Nazi Germany until 1940. His account reads like a novel rather than dry history, and is simply a page-turner. No one book can adequately convey the horror of the Third Reich, but no other one volume has done it so well.
The Face of Battle
The Mask of Command
The Price of Admiralty, by John Keegan
The "holy trinity" of military history. Keegan is Britain's most notable military historian, and his three volumes covering land warfare, naval warfare, and command are a must-read for any serious student. The Face of Battle discusses the evolution of land warfare by analyzing various battles while The Price of Admiralty does the same thing for naval warfare. My favorite, The Mask of Command, goes behind the mask of military leaders to discover what makes a good and bad leader during times of war.
The Civil War: A Narrative, by Shelby Foote
Foote's three volume set is by far the most enjoyable overall history of the American Civil War ever written. Foote is a good ol' boy from Mississippi, and his antebellum southern charm comes through in his addictive writing. In particular, the section discussing the Battle of Gettysburg, "Stars in Their Courses", is both vivid and emotional in impact and historical accuracy.
When Titans Clashed; How the Red Army Stopped Hitler, by David M. Glantz
Glantz is the best historian covering the Soviet Union before and during World War II. The war between Nazi Germany and Soviet Union was the single largest military struggle of all time, and this book nails the reasons for the Nazi's failure and Soviet's success. Strips away tons of myths and assumptions about supposed German superiority and invincibility. A serious work, but still very readable.
The Forgotten Soldier, by Guy Sajer
First person accounts are a dime a dozen, but no other book has captured the heat of battle quite as well as this one. Whether liberties with the truth were taken or not (quite a controversy exists as to whether or not Sajer served with the unit described) one cannot deny the emotional impact of this book. You can smell the battlefield as Sajer recounts the exploits of a famous German division fighting the Red Army on the Eastern Front in World War II. Told from the frontline soldier's point of view with no political motivation.
Meditations, by Emperor Marcus Aurelius
A philosophy book written by a Roman Emperor? You bet. The Stoic philosophy defined every aspect of Roman society; especially in the training of their famous legions. The Roman legion dominated warfare for hundreds of years, and the rock-solid discipline hammered into their soldiers had a great deal to do with that success. Aurelius's masterpiece of philosophy is a good way to put yourself in their shoes.
Band of Brothers (book and miniseries)
Citizen Soldiers, by Stephen Ambrose
Ambrose is a great historian, even if some of his books were not as good as his World War II stuff. These two examples are some of the best books on the American experience in World War II in Europe. Band of Brothers was used as the basis for the HBO mini-series of the same name. It tells the story of a company of paratroopers from their early training until the end of the war. Citizen Soldiers is a more generic depiction of the U.S. Army's experience in Europe. Like Foote's Civil War books Ambrose combines solid history and readability which is rare thing in the genre.
Guadalcanal: The Definitive Account of the Landmark Battle, by Richard Frank
Guadalcanal was the greatest battle of the Pacific War in World War II. Both on sea and land the armies and navies of the Empire of Japan and the United States did battle to the death for dominance over an insignificant piece of real estate. Places like Henderson Field, Savo Island, Ironbottom Sound, and Edson's Ridge became legendary in military history. Victory by the United States ensured victory over Japan, though it took three more grueling years of no-quarter battle to achieve this forgone conclusion. This book covers all aspects of the battle better than any other single history.
The First World War, by John Keegan
This general history of World War I is Keegan at his best. I read the whole thing in one sitting. World War I is the saddest excuse for a war humanity ever came up with, and the millions who died in terrible trench warfare could attest to the futility of it all. The narrative can sometimes be dry as a martini in places, but the essence of the war and it's insanity come through loud and clear.
Saving Private Ryan, Directed by Steven Spielberg
One has never seen battle on film until one has seen the first twenty minutes of "Saving Private Ryan". Ambrose's book, D-Day: June 6th, 1944: The Climatic Battle of World War II, was used as the main source for this movie. While it takes huge historical leaps and liberties the authentic flavor of battle is what this movie is all about. No one interested in the subject should miss this film.
Triumph of the Will, Directed by Leni Riefenstahl
Hitler's masterwork of propaganda. Depicts the Nazi Party's Nuremberg rally in 1934. Watch it because it will show you, beyond any shadow of doubt, why millions of German's set aside their humanity to follow a demon into hell. Note: Not an endorsement of the message.
Paths of Glory, Directed by Stanley Kubrick
I love this World War I antiwar film even more than the better known "All Quiet on the Western Front". The horror of World War I is summed up perfectly in this film which stars Kirk Douglas in an unforgettable performance of a man fighting against his own army. One of the greatest closing arguments ever shot on screen should make mandatory viewing for trial lawyers.
Patton, Directed by Franklin J. Schaffner
General George S. Patton was America's greatest field general of World War II. A perfect study of the man, myth, and legend. As much a study in personality as a war movie. Patton exemplifies the best and worst of us, just like war itself. George C. Scott gave a performance of a lifetime, and the best opening scene of any movie in history (IMO).
Tora!, Tora!, Tora!, Directed by Richard Fleischer and Kinji Fukasaku
A boring telling of the Pearl Harbor attack unless you're a history buff, but no doubt the most accurate Pacific theatre movie made up until "The Pacific" mini-series. Interesting note: The American and Japanese portions of the film were shot separately allowing directors to show both perspectives so it's almost two movies in one. It's a history lesson, but a good one.
We Were Soldiers, Directed by Randall Wallace
An amazing film based on the book by the unit's commanding officer. The best Vietnam movie, IMO. A great study in command and courage. Some may find it a bit over the top with the "Ra, Ra, Ra," nature of the story. I think that's forgivable considering the tone of films like "Platoon" and "Apocalypse Now".
Gettysburg, Directed by Ronald F. Maxwell
A mostly accurate re-telling of the great American Civil War battle. Based on the historical novel, The Killer Angels, by Michael Shaara. A battle as massive as Gettysburg is very hard to portray in a film, but this one does it skillfully by focusing on the key players, and sticking to the bigger pieces of the battle. Interesting Note: Ted Turner plays an extra, and takes a bullet during Pickett's Charge, the film's climatic scene. He paid for the film, so I guess he was entitled.
The Grey Zone, Directed by Tim Blake Nelson
"Schindler's List" is the obvious choice for a Holocaust film, but I prefer my martini straight up. "The Grey Zone" is uncomfortable to watch from beginning to end, but should be required viewing for all students. It's movies like this that remind us all how fragile our humanity and freedom are, and how quickly they can be snuffed out in a blink of an eye.
Glory, Directed by Edward Zwick
My favorite war movie of all time. Beautiful cinematography and music. Performances from Matthew Broderick, Denzel Washington, and Morgan Freeman are Oscar worthy. The history is solid, and told with so much emotional impact you will not be dry-eyed by the end. Some movies are about the American Civil War; this was the war. Incredible.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Post Fifteen
Hard Times: Part Nine
For my final post about my prison experience I would like to share some of my opinions and observations based on my own personal experiences combined with my professional education and research.
"Criminal Justice" is an oxymoron. Like the military, the justice system likes the use of such phrases to make things that are incredibly dangerous and violent sound innocuous. During the Cold War our military and political leaders loved to name our nuclear weapons things like "Peacekeeper". Even the War Department's name was changed to Department of Defense to better reflect a non-aggressive stance. Something soft and yummy like Momma's apple pie. Like this example from the military, the American criminal justice system is loaded with contradiction and hyperbole designed to make us all think we are doing something wholesome and pure. And while I would say that the goals of both the American military and justice system are noble on the highest levels the tactics that are used in our name have strayed so far from a pure intent as to jeopardize the whole system.
A Call for the Decriminalization of Drugs
Prohibition was probably the single best example in American history of a policy with good intentions creating something that was ultimately disastrous on so many levels as to be laughable. The sheer arrogance that drugs are any different from alcohol is really becoming an untenable argument on so many levels. Almost every month we are seeing law enforcement busting down doors, terrorizing families, and even shooting the family's dog all in the name of seizing a couple of joints. These actions are not only unconstitutional but brutal in their approach. Thomas Jefferson would be rolling over in his grave.
In the end, there are two organizations who benefit from illegal drugs. The first group would be the drug cartel and street level dealers who make billions of dollars off of tax-free, illegal drugs. The violence that results from rivals killing each other is getting to the point of where a real war is actually being fought and lost by law enforcement; the Mexican drug war on our southern border has killed over 30,000 people in the last few years. Our inner cities are rife with violence and hopelessness as the only way out for most of these kids are gangs and the drug money that goes with being in one.
The second group who benefits is law enforcement. The amount of money spent fighting drugs is enormous and totally out of proportion to the success they provide. The DEA has become the modern version of the Treasury Department during prohibition. While individual agents are risking their lives going undercover in the drug world the billions of taxpayer dollars that flow into the bureaucracy is itself criminal in it's waste. However, each year we pour more funds on a local, county, state, and federal level expecting a different result. Short of throwing the Constitution out the window and the creation of a police state we will never, ever be able to "win" this war. I would much rather be free than to see the means necessary to eliminate drug use from the street level (the elimination of the right against unlawful search and seizure and warrantless arrests are two things that would be necessary, at the very least).
Finally, I can tell you from personal experience that putting drug users and dealers in prison is a doomed method to cure the drug scourge. I can't tell you how many "1 Year and 1 Day" prison sentences I seen handed down by judges for a violation of probation due to using or selling illegal drugs. These felons are put into the system with some of the most violent people on earth. What comes out after a few months with these wonderful blokes as your cellmate is not a rehabilitate drug user, but more often than not a violent, hardened criminal. He or she will most likely be back in and out of the justice system for the rest of their lives. From a cost standpoint it is very expensive to house these felons in state and federal prisons. Compared to county jails the cost of housing these prisoners at the state and federal level is much higher, and to what end? It just blows my mind.
Our country is broke. A major source of revenue would be the legalization of drugs and the high taxes that could be placed on their sale. If only some of this money generated would go towards rehabilitation and prevention you would see a much more positive result than throwing these people in prison. Drug use, in my opinion, would go down instead of up.
Should we legalize all drugs tomorrow? No. We should start with marijuana as a trial balloon. If libertarians like me are wrong, then by all means, go back and make it's use and sale illegal again. We can't continue on our current course, in any event. Even if you disagree with me you would have to admit that the War on Drugs in it's present form is a war we lost a long time ago. It's time to try something radically different. Let's come up with a capitalist solution to the problem, and put these drug dealers out of business tomorrow.
Prison is for Violent People
Non-violent crime, the two most common examples being theft and drug use, should never be punished with prison sentences. You must understand that prison is an incredibly violent place. If your intent is to rehabilitate the criminal you will be sadly disappointed. I had many inmates who were on their 5th, 6th, and 7th prison stretches. Rehabilitation is one of those things that liberals in classrooms talk about in theory, but never once have these pinhead professors spent one day working inside a hardcore prison. Their theory is so wrong it makes my head hurt.
My solution would be to house only violent offenders in prisons. If you murder, rape, or molest you belong in prison for the rest of your life. If you commit armed robberies as your career of choice you belong in prison for a very long time. If you love to beat people up for fun, you need to go to be housed with others who feel the same way. Too often, our prison system takes a non-violent person and makes the person into a hardcore, violent criminal on their eventual release. The reason for this is primarily borne out of necessity. Like a cynical Sergeant once told me, "You either fight, or f#$%." While crass, this statement is very true. Prison for inmates is very much Lord of the Flies; might makes right, the weak perish, and the sheep are slaughtered. What do you think would happen under those conditions? Violence in prison is not merely a symptom, but a way of life. A state of existence. A reality.
Sex Offenders Should Go To Hell
So much for my objectivity. While I am very open minded about drugs, I am the polar opposite when it comes to sex offenders. There is not a single worse person on the planet than a child molester. I have known hundreds, and consider this chilling fact. For every one of those creatures I had the misfortune of knowing personally they were responsible for molesting, on average at least one hundred victims. Victims whose innocence was taken from them in the worst possible way. I am not God, and I am generally a pretty non-violent guy for the most part. But I have no use for this filth. Life in prison is the only legitimate sentence. They should never see the light of day again. There are exceptions, such as statutory rape. Why our system of justice doesn't distinguish between these "criminals" and a child molester is another problem. Believe me, there is a huge difference.
In Florida, we have a facility for sex offenders called the Jimmy Ryce Unit. It is not under the auspices of the Department of Corrections, but the Division of Children and Families. Basically, a battery of mental health professionals evaluate a sex offender before his release. If they deem him irredeemable, then the inmate is sent to this facility under an involuntary, indefinite, civil commitment. I think this is basically a good idea, but flawed in it's execution. Why not just make certain types of sex crimes life sentences? No need for an expensive, separate facility that has absolutely no business being outside the FDOC's supervision.
The Death Penalty is Broken
This is a tough issue for me. For many years, I was as pro-death penalty as one could get. However, I have had a change of heart. For me, it's a question of morals. I am pro-life. I do not believe in the early termination of a pregnancy as a form of birth control. It's wrong, and I would never support it. How, then, can I play God and say it's within my rights to take your life? Evil for evil is a losing proposition. And if you think I am some lefty fruitcake from the 60's consider this: a lifetime in prison is no vacation in paradise. In truth, I would much rather be taken out and shot in the back of the head then spend the rest of my life behind bars. It's that bad, people.
If we were to look at the death penalty objectively there are two major arguments for it. One I can reject on an intellectual level, and the other on a moral level. The first argument is that the death penalty deters crime. It doesn't, folks. I never once had a person who had been on death row tell me that because he would be executed that was reason enough for him not to do the crime. Murder is something that is in the heart, and premeditated murder is something that comes from the soul; a very dark and black one. Once you have committed yourself to such a path nothing will deter you. Certainly not years waiting to be executed.
The second argument is that the death penalty is justice served. What people are really saying is that it's a legal lynching. It's the most honest argument for the death penalty, and one that I can relate to on a personal level. If my family had been brutally murdered by someone I can't say for one second that I wouldn't love to see the perp drawn and quartered. Is it right, though, and does it jive with a moral philosophy of behavior? No. So we must surrender to the better angels of our nature, love the sinner, and make sure he is as uncomfortable as possible serving a hellish time behind walls for the rest of his life.
Conclusion
I realize these are hot-button issues, and I am well aware of the counter arguments. I respect them. These opinions are expressed from the heart, but also derived from actual experience. I wouldn't tell an NFL quarterback how to throw a ball into coverage without first being able to relate on a practical level. Working in the justice system for almost a decade, along with 5 years of schooling, does give the basis for an informed opinion beyond the norm.
Does that mean I am always right? Heck, no. Your morality may not be mine, and I admit that I could be wrong. To err is human. I would hope, though, you would consider these arguments with an open mind. At the very least, I hope these words provided a spark of thought in the grey matter. In the end, that's all a writer can ask for.
I hope you have enjoyed this nine part series of "Hard Times". Till next time...
For my final post about my prison experience I would like to share some of my opinions and observations based on my own personal experiences combined with my professional education and research.
"Criminal Justice" is an oxymoron. Like the military, the justice system likes the use of such phrases to make things that are incredibly dangerous and violent sound innocuous. During the Cold War our military and political leaders loved to name our nuclear weapons things like "Peacekeeper". Even the War Department's name was changed to Department of Defense to better reflect a non-aggressive stance. Something soft and yummy like Momma's apple pie. Like this example from the military, the American criminal justice system is loaded with contradiction and hyperbole designed to make us all think we are doing something wholesome and pure. And while I would say that the goals of both the American military and justice system are noble on the highest levels the tactics that are used in our name have strayed so far from a pure intent as to jeopardize the whole system.
A Call for the Decriminalization of Drugs
Prohibition was probably the single best example in American history of a policy with good intentions creating something that was ultimately disastrous on so many levels as to be laughable. The sheer arrogance that drugs are any different from alcohol is really becoming an untenable argument on so many levels. Almost every month we are seeing law enforcement busting down doors, terrorizing families, and even shooting the family's dog all in the name of seizing a couple of joints. These actions are not only unconstitutional but brutal in their approach. Thomas Jefferson would be rolling over in his grave.
In the end, there are two organizations who benefit from illegal drugs. The first group would be the drug cartel and street level dealers who make billions of dollars off of tax-free, illegal drugs. The violence that results from rivals killing each other is getting to the point of where a real war is actually being fought and lost by law enforcement; the Mexican drug war on our southern border has killed over 30,000 people in the last few years. Our inner cities are rife with violence and hopelessness as the only way out for most of these kids are gangs and the drug money that goes with being in one.
The second group who benefits is law enforcement. The amount of money spent fighting drugs is enormous and totally out of proportion to the success they provide. The DEA has become the modern version of the Treasury Department during prohibition. While individual agents are risking their lives going undercover in the drug world the billions of taxpayer dollars that flow into the bureaucracy is itself criminal in it's waste. However, each year we pour more funds on a local, county, state, and federal level expecting a different result. Short of throwing the Constitution out the window and the creation of a police state we will never, ever be able to "win" this war. I would much rather be free than to see the means necessary to eliminate drug use from the street level (the elimination of the right against unlawful search and seizure and warrantless arrests are two things that would be necessary, at the very least).
Finally, I can tell you from personal experience that putting drug users and dealers in prison is a doomed method to cure the drug scourge. I can't tell you how many "1 Year and 1 Day" prison sentences I seen handed down by judges for a violation of probation due to using or selling illegal drugs. These felons are put into the system with some of the most violent people on earth. What comes out after a few months with these wonderful blokes as your cellmate is not a rehabilitate drug user, but more often than not a violent, hardened criminal. He or she will most likely be back in and out of the justice system for the rest of their lives. From a cost standpoint it is very expensive to house these felons in state and federal prisons. Compared to county jails the cost of housing these prisoners at the state and federal level is much higher, and to what end? It just blows my mind.
Our country is broke. A major source of revenue would be the legalization of drugs and the high taxes that could be placed on their sale. If only some of this money generated would go towards rehabilitation and prevention you would see a much more positive result than throwing these people in prison. Drug use, in my opinion, would go down instead of up.
Should we legalize all drugs tomorrow? No. We should start with marijuana as a trial balloon. If libertarians like me are wrong, then by all means, go back and make it's use and sale illegal again. We can't continue on our current course, in any event. Even if you disagree with me you would have to admit that the War on Drugs in it's present form is a war we lost a long time ago. It's time to try something radically different. Let's come up with a capitalist solution to the problem, and put these drug dealers out of business tomorrow.
Prison is for Violent People
Non-violent crime, the two most common examples being theft and drug use, should never be punished with prison sentences. You must understand that prison is an incredibly violent place. If your intent is to rehabilitate the criminal you will be sadly disappointed. I had many inmates who were on their 5th, 6th, and 7th prison stretches. Rehabilitation is one of those things that liberals in classrooms talk about in theory, but never once have these pinhead professors spent one day working inside a hardcore prison. Their theory is so wrong it makes my head hurt.
My solution would be to house only violent offenders in prisons. If you murder, rape, or molest you belong in prison for the rest of your life. If you commit armed robberies as your career of choice you belong in prison for a very long time. If you love to beat people up for fun, you need to go to be housed with others who feel the same way. Too often, our prison system takes a non-violent person and makes the person into a hardcore, violent criminal on their eventual release. The reason for this is primarily borne out of necessity. Like a cynical Sergeant once told me, "You either fight, or f#$%." While crass, this statement is very true. Prison for inmates is very much Lord of the Flies; might makes right, the weak perish, and the sheep are slaughtered. What do you think would happen under those conditions? Violence in prison is not merely a symptom, but a way of life. A state of existence. A reality.
Sex Offenders Should Go To Hell
So much for my objectivity. While I am very open minded about drugs, I am the polar opposite when it comes to sex offenders. There is not a single worse person on the planet than a child molester. I have known hundreds, and consider this chilling fact. For every one of those creatures I had the misfortune of knowing personally they were responsible for molesting, on average at least one hundred victims. Victims whose innocence was taken from them in the worst possible way. I am not God, and I am generally a pretty non-violent guy for the most part. But I have no use for this filth. Life in prison is the only legitimate sentence. They should never see the light of day again. There are exceptions, such as statutory rape. Why our system of justice doesn't distinguish between these "criminals" and a child molester is another problem. Believe me, there is a huge difference.
In Florida, we have a facility for sex offenders called the Jimmy Ryce Unit. It is not under the auspices of the Department of Corrections, but the Division of Children and Families. Basically, a battery of mental health professionals evaluate a sex offender before his release. If they deem him irredeemable, then the inmate is sent to this facility under an involuntary, indefinite, civil commitment. I think this is basically a good idea, but flawed in it's execution. Why not just make certain types of sex crimes life sentences? No need for an expensive, separate facility that has absolutely no business being outside the FDOC's supervision.
The Death Penalty is Broken
This is a tough issue for me. For many years, I was as pro-death penalty as one could get. However, I have had a change of heart. For me, it's a question of morals. I am pro-life. I do not believe in the early termination of a pregnancy as a form of birth control. It's wrong, and I would never support it. How, then, can I play God and say it's within my rights to take your life? Evil for evil is a losing proposition. And if you think I am some lefty fruitcake from the 60's consider this: a lifetime in prison is no vacation in paradise. In truth, I would much rather be taken out and shot in the back of the head then spend the rest of my life behind bars. It's that bad, people.
If we were to look at the death penalty objectively there are two major arguments for it. One I can reject on an intellectual level, and the other on a moral level. The first argument is that the death penalty deters crime. It doesn't, folks. I never once had a person who had been on death row tell me that because he would be executed that was reason enough for him not to do the crime. Murder is something that is in the heart, and premeditated murder is something that comes from the soul; a very dark and black one. Once you have committed yourself to such a path nothing will deter you. Certainly not years waiting to be executed.
The second argument is that the death penalty is justice served. What people are really saying is that it's a legal lynching. It's the most honest argument for the death penalty, and one that I can relate to on a personal level. If my family had been brutally murdered by someone I can't say for one second that I wouldn't love to see the perp drawn and quartered. Is it right, though, and does it jive with a moral philosophy of behavior? No. So we must surrender to the better angels of our nature, love the sinner, and make sure he is as uncomfortable as possible serving a hellish time behind walls for the rest of his life.
Conclusion
I realize these are hot-button issues, and I am well aware of the counter arguments. I respect them. These opinions are expressed from the heart, but also derived from actual experience. I wouldn't tell an NFL quarterback how to throw a ball into coverage without first being able to relate on a practical level. Working in the justice system for almost a decade, along with 5 years of schooling, does give the basis for an informed opinion beyond the norm.
Does that mean I am always right? Heck, no. Your morality may not be mine, and I admit that I could be wrong. To err is human. I would hope, though, you would consider these arguments with an open mind. At the very least, I hope these words provided a spark of thought in the grey matter. In the end, that's all a writer can ask for.
I hope you have enjoyed this nine part series of "Hard Times". Till next time...
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Post Fourteen
Hard Times: Part Eight
This post was going to be the last concerning my experience working in the Florida prison system. That was the plan last week. Then I started thinking about a great many stories that you might find interesting. However, due to time constraints, I thought I would put these stories in a "Best/Worst Of" format. Hope you enjoy.
Worst Inmate
A tough one. So many candidates. However, there is one that really deserves this award above all others. This inmate came to prison in the 70's convicted of murder and rape. While in prison, he followed up this achievement by taking a female civilian hostage and raping her repeatedly. He fancies himself a disciple of Charles Manson, and put a tattoo of a swastika in between his eyes. He wrote and spoke the most horrifying threats imaginable; sent chills up the spine. He was diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic, but I felt that was an inappropriate diagnosis; he is just plain evil. He is a writer of extremely convoluted and complicated grievances and lawsuits. He threatened to kill me for lying in front of a judge against him during one of these suits. An extremely unpopular inmate among other inmates, but he was in solitary confinement during nearly all the time I had him so no one actually tried to kill him. No doubt the worst prisoner I ever had the displeasure of dealing with on a daily basis.
Worst Crime
Again, many candidates. However, this one is not for the faint of heart so stop reading if graphic violence bothers you. We received this inmate while we were still a general population facility. He was married and his wife became pregnant. As the baby started to show the man went berserk; he claimed the child was not his and she had an affair. He proceeded to stab his wife many times about the body. Once she was subdued he cut the baby from her stomach. He put the baby's remains in a suitcase, and mailed the suitcase to her mother. Somehow, he only received a life sentence. I think the D.A. felt that the crime was so bizarre that he might have had a mental handicap mitigation defense. He tried to escape from Charlotte, and spent years on Close Management. Ugly stuff.
Worst Start in Life
There is a debate on whether evil is born or learned. The answer is really both, but I think sometimes a person can be a bad seed right from the start with little blame to themselves. Such was the case of this inmate. His mother was a crack whore in Miami. His Dad raped her, and then Mom murdered Dad. His mother is serving life for that killing. So, this inmate was the product of rape and murder. He proceeded to follow in Mom and Dad's footsteps by raping and murdering his way into prison. Serving a life sentence for multiple counts of both crimes. You could feel the evil coming off of this one; truly a dark cloud hovered over him. A permanent resident of the Mental Health Unit due to non-manageable sociopath behavior.
Best Correctional Officer
No doubt this was my Close Management Dorm Lieutenant. The man was a rock and tough as nails. He never tried to be a friend to inmates or staff; you did your job, or you went to hell. I liked that. You always knew where you stood, and we really ran a great dorm together. Had my back through the thick and thin, and I let him do his job with minimal interference. A brother-in-arms that I truly miss.
Best Correctional Employee
My Supervisor who is now an Assistant Warden of Programs. I wouldn't have made it in correctional work without him. I really owe any success I ever had to him. A father-figure who treated me like a son.
The Only Inmate I Ever Felt Sorry For
If you have ever had a little (or lot) to drink and got behind a wheel of car you will understand this story more than most. He was a guy you could have met on the street, and I could have easily have been him. He was sick, and talk a high-powered, codeine-based cold medicine. He drove his family to some kind of function, and then went the bar. He had a couple of beers (he was barely over the limit), and picked up his family. On the drive home he was involved in a car wreck that killed his wife and daughter. Of course, he survived. His wife's family pressed for the maximum sentence, and he is serving 15 years in prison. I'm not saying he was innocent because he wasn't. But for the grace of God go I....
The Most Beautiful Music Performance I Ever Saw
Forgive me for not being politically correct, but blacks really have a set of pipes. Prison has a way of bringing out extreme emotion, and a bunch of black convicts who have a lot of emotion to get out really can put on a show. The Chaplain put on a gospel sing/breakfast for the staff one day. It was incredible. I have never heard such passion and pain expressed through the voice. Amazing in every way, and that music will stay with me for the rest of my life.
The Scariest Place in the State of Florida
There are scary places, and then there are really scary places. I have stood on the battlefield of Gettysburg and felt chills run through me; the place was alive. However, it pales in comparison to the death chamber at Florida State Prison in Starke. Hundreds of people have been either electrocuted by Ol' Sparky (the name of the electric chair) or by lethal injection. Such luminaries as Ted Bundy have taken the green mile to it's walls and met their maker. It's a chilling place, and one that I hope I never see again.
The Funniest Inmate I Ever Met
This inmate was a bug, meaning he was crazy but with NOS as a diagnosis-Not Otherwise Specified. The man was just plain nuts. His favorite thing to do was to pick up discarded cigarette butts and eat them. One day, he found an officer's golf cart with the keys in the starter. The officers spent the better part of half a day tracking him down.
So, that's it for the stories. I will get to my opinions (and the final post) in the next week or two.
This post was going to be the last concerning my experience working in the Florida prison system. That was the plan last week. Then I started thinking about a great many stories that you might find interesting. However, due to time constraints, I thought I would put these stories in a "Best/Worst Of" format. Hope you enjoy.
Worst Inmate
A tough one. So many candidates. However, there is one that really deserves this award above all others. This inmate came to prison in the 70's convicted of murder and rape. While in prison, he followed up this achievement by taking a female civilian hostage and raping her repeatedly. He fancies himself a disciple of Charles Manson, and put a tattoo of a swastika in between his eyes. He wrote and spoke the most horrifying threats imaginable; sent chills up the spine. He was diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic, but I felt that was an inappropriate diagnosis; he is just plain evil. He is a writer of extremely convoluted and complicated grievances and lawsuits. He threatened to kill me for lying in front of a judge against him during one of these suits. An extremely unpopular inmate among other inmates, but he was in solitary confinement during nearly all the time I had him so no one actually tried to kill him. No doubt the worst prisoner I ever had the displeasure of dealing with on a daily basis.
Worst Crime
Again, many candidates. However, this one is not for the faint of heart so stop reading if graphic violence bothers you. We received this inmate while we were still a general population facility. He was married and his wife became pregnant. As the baby started to show the man went berserk; he claimed the child was not his and she had an affair. He proceeded to stab his wife many times about the body. Once she was subdued he cut the baby from her stomach. He put the baby's remains in a suitcase, and mailed the suitcase to her mother. Somehow, he only received a life sentence. I think the D.A. felt that the crime was so bizarre that he might have had a mental handicap mitigation defense. He tried to escape from Charlotte, and spent years on Close Management. Ugly stuff.
Worst Start in Life
There is a debate on whether evil is born or learned. The answer is really both, but I think sometimes a person can be a bad seed right from the start with little blame to themselves. Such was the case of this inmate. His mother was a crack whore in Miami. His Dad raped her, and then Mom murdered Dad. His mother is serving life for that killing. So, this inmate was the product of rape and murder. He proceeded to follow in Mom and Dad's footsteps by raping and murdering his way into prison. Serving a life sentence for multiple counts of both crimes. You could feel the evil coming off of this one; truly a dark cloud hovered over him. A permanent resident of the Mental Health Unit due to non-manageable sociopath behavior.
Best Correctional Officer
No doubt this was my Close Management Dorm Lieutenant. The man was a rock and tough as nails. He never tried to be a friend to inmates or staff; you did your job, or you went to hell. I liked that. You always knew where you stood, and we really ran a great dorm together. Had my back through the thick and thin, and I let him do his job with minimal interference. A brother-in-arms that I truly miss.
Best Correctional Employee
My Supervisor who is now an Assistant Warden of Programs. I wouldn't have made it in correctional work without him. I really owe any success I ever had to him. A father-figure who treated me like a son.
The Only Inmate I Ever Felt Sorry For
If you have ever had a little (or lot) to drink and got behind a wheel of car you will understand this story more than most. He was a guy you could have met on the street, and I could have easily have been him. He was sick, and talk a high-powered, codeine-based cold medicine. He drove his family to some kind of function, and then went the bar. He had a couple of beers (he was barely over the limit), and picked up his family. On the drive home he was involved in a car wreck that killed his wife and daughter. Of course, he survived. His wife's family pressed for the maximum sentence, and he is serving 15 years in prison. I'm not saying he was innocent because he wasn't. But for the grace of God go I....
The Most Beautiful Music Performance I Ever Saw
Forgive me for not being politically correct, but blacks really have a set of pipes. Prison has a way of bringing out extreme emotion, and a bunch of black convicts who have a lot of emotion to get out really can put on a show. The Chaplain put on a gospel sing/breakfast for the staff one day. It was incredible. I have never heard such passion and pain expressed through the voice. Amazing in every way, and that music will stay with me for the rest of my life.
The Scariest Place in the State of Florida
There are scary places, and then there are really scary places. I have stood on the battlefield of Gettysburg and felt chills run through me; the place was alive. However, it pales in comparison to the death chamber at Florida State Prison in Starke. Hundreds of people have been either electrocuted by Ol' Sparky (the name of the electric chair) or by lethal injection. Such luminaries as Ted Bundy have taken the green mile to it's walls and met their maker. It's a chilling place, and one that I hope I never see again.
The Funniest Inmate I Ever Met
This inmate was a bug, meaning he was crazy but with NOS as a diagnosis-Not Otherwise Specified. The man was just plain nuts. His favorite thing to do was to pick up discarded cigarette butts and eat them. One day, he found an officer's golf cart with the keys in the starter. The officers spent the better part of half a day tracking him down.
So, that's it for the stories. I will get to my opinions (and the final post) in the next week or two.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)